We performed a comparison between OpenText Diagnostics and OpenText SiteScope based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The diagnostics and configuration are the solution's most valuable aspects."
"For banking and telecom solutions, it's been quite useful."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus Diagnostics is the information reported from an application that has timed out. For example, when you're Googling, or you're booking a ticket for Burj Khalifa here, the longest tower in the world, there are situations where the system can time out. There are times when you might not receive a response on the payment gateway or you are not able to find the reservation. The customer only receives the information that the session has timed out."
"There's no agent you need installed on the servers. In our environment, we have some servers out of our control so we cannot manage them. We use SiteScope to monitor the availability, the resources on the servers, etc. This allows us to do this job without installing agents so there's no need to take care of anything on the server."
"It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"The tool has capabilities other than managing web-based applications, like URL Monitor and EPI Script. It is also easy to use the tool."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"VM monitoring is pretty good showing good visualizations of how VMs are operating within the context of all the VMs running on the same hypervisor."
"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."
"The interface is very old, and not very user-friendly. Most of our clients don't like the UI."
"The interface could be more user friendly."
"The GUI and metrics of Micro Focus Diagnostics can be improved. The metrics the solution gathers can be limited and could be enhanced by giving more details."
"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"We have four or five data centers around North America where we have it deployed into a single or a two-server primary backup type of deployment. All those are made available under a single GUI provided by Micro Focus that allows you to put them all together. A room for improvement would be an appliance or a server that would manage all of our other servers so that I don't have to remember to log on to all different servers and data centers. I could manage them from a single location."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"In terms of issues with Micro Focus SiteScope, some that we've run into were unintended, for example, extra executions of monitors and some false alerts when there were problems connecting to endpoints or there were issues with the application that sometimes resulted in false positives. We had a few issues with the way time zones were configured when the system time differed from the time indicated during the monitoring, but those were just little things that weren't too bad. As far as the limitations of Micro Focus SiteScope, the types of scripting files that can be executed are rather limited unless you go to some third-party plugins. These are the areas for improvement in the solution."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
Earn 20 points
OpenText Diagnostics is ranked 34th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 4 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 27th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. OpenText Diagnostics is rated 7.8, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of OpenText Diagnostics writes "Very good for transaction level monitoring, but expensive and HP needs better support and training". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText SiteScope writes "Doesn't require much custom coding and can run on different platforms, but the types of scripting files you can execute on it are limited". OpenText Diagnostics is most compared with Dynatrace, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our OpenText Diagnostics vs. OpenText SiteScope report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.